The idea of a policy brief is to either argue for a particular course of action or to give enough information for a policymaker to make up their own mind. What style do you think I wrote about?
The general gist of my policy was that simply “banning straws” is not enough to actually make an impact. When we are concerned about Canada’s contribution to ecological destruction we must do far more than that. Since the six categories of plastic waste barely make up that much of ocean plastics there are better ways to achieve our goal. Industry and packaging material actually makes up more of the plastic waste made. Furthermore, ghost gear is arguably even worse for the environment because not only is it waste but it can trap and kill things. Lastly, a more important contributor to Canada’s ecological footprint is actually fossil fuel burning!
If we want action to occur we need to spread the word. Below is a brainstormed list of people that we can send this type of thing.
Alaska pollock, also known as walleye pollock and gadus chalcogrammus, is a relatively short lived and fast growing species reaching sexual maturity at 3-4 years. Unlike the Atlantic cod which is infamously known for being overfished and whose fishery has collapsed, the Alaska Pollock fishery is the second largest fishery in the world with a net worth of 1.9 billion dollars. Over 3 million tonnes are harvested annually via pelagic trawling and specifically the Alaskan fishery harvest nearly 1.2 million tonnes a year. The remaining biomass is fished by somewhat poorly managed russian federation vessels. However, I will only speak to the Alaskan fishery.
The North Pacific Management Council which comprises stakeholders, fishers, and scientists set the annual allotted catch rate. With 100% observer coverage due to fisher and community cooperation, the Alaskan Fisheries science centre, which is a part of the american national fisheries service, assigns scientifically trained professionals to be onboard commercial vessels to monitor the catch and subsample data.
Furthermore they not only analyze fishery effects on adults but emphasize the future impacts on the next generations. For example, abnormally warm weather which may negatively impact juvenile survival will lead the council to adjust the catch rate based on where future population trends may be tending towards! Additionally, the ecosystem roles of alaska pollock are taken into consideration to ensure that food web effects are minimized.
In the most recent annual stock assessments, the population has been listed as above average with no signs of stocks being overfished, subject to overfishing, or even approaching overfished status.
Moreso, this fishery has been identified as an MSC certified fishery for 15 years in a row and evidenced by that there are independent studies which show that bycatch remains less than 1% and that the population remains stable. This also makes pelagic trawling appear somewhat targeted, and limits the effect on other species. Additionally, unlike bottom trawling, contact with the sea floor almost never happens and damage to the benthos is unlikely.
This fishery is an amazing example of how large economically important powerhouses may still be sustainably managed. With strong community support and engagement, they were able to achieve 100 percent coverage meaning that scientists would know what was going in and out of the ecosystem for monitoring and even regulation. Furthermore the data could be used to create comprehensive plans which would protect food web interactions, future population trends, and the local economy.
Join Harry on a harrowing journey from egg to adult. Read and learn about the trials he must pass through! Everything was written and drawn by me so I hope that you enjoy! (I had lots of fun drawing it too.)
The status of marine species is carefully assigned by governmental and non-governmental organizations. These statuses can influence policies, actions, and plans. Especially in the regards to fisheries, it can be greatly indicative of issues.
Status of Marine Species
What: It is a classification given to a marine species by the IUCN, and it denotes a certain level of susceptibility. There are three levels of threatened classifications: vulnerable, endangered, and critically endangered.
How: The level of classification is based on known variables which can include habitat size/distribution, population size, and reproductive age. Smaller habitats, populations, and higher sexual maturation age. These are done through evaluations and research.
Why: This helps lawmakers and policymakers make decisions of ocean conservation, and also in controlling/regulating fisheries.
When: This is done every 10 or so years, so a reevaluation undergoes.
Where: The status of marine species is determined by the IUCN and thus has an international presence.
Who: The IUCN
Fish exploitation
Breed slow, small population
Endangered status
A haiku by me!
The stocks which are commonly at risk of ‘over-exploitation’ are those with slow maturations, small populations, and high palatability. If people demand it, they will disappear. If they can’t reproduce fast enough or the population isn’t large enough to recover, they disappear forever…
When it comes to protecting the marine environment and the ocean’s fisheries, MPA’s or marine protected areas commonly come to mind. Within the term of MPA, there is a vast range of subtypes with varying degrees of protection and regulation.
A coalition of 50 countries has promised to protect 30 percent to protect the land and sea in the next 10 years. And according to a study published in 2004, it would cost between 5 and 19 billion dollars annually to achieve this goal. This range heavily depends on the degree of protection in which is afforded to these protected areas. Therefore a question that comes to mind is whether or not the cheaper less intensive protection regimens will be effective enough to make an impact on recovering wildstock. A University of New South Wales study led by John Turball and a team of researchers evaluated the social and ecological effectiveness of partially protected marine areas.
Contrary to what was previously assumed about partial protection; that some protection is better than no protection, the researchers found no difference in fish, algae, or invertebrate abundance and diversity when compared to open unprotected regions. Furthermore, through interviews and observation they found no social benefits (as in human-use, perception, and value) in comparison to regions unprotected. It was only when the researchers analyzed fully protected marine areas did they observe increases in fish diversity, abundance, and mean size.
Moreso, interviews of 439 respondents found that 92 percent of people supported the strict protective measures of a wholly protected area. Therefore bucking the assumptions that fully protected MPA’s were socially unwelcome.
These protected regions not only had strong public support but also hosted two times the divers and three times the snorkelers. Thus, indicating an increase in non-destructive recreational activity and social value.
Only three percent of the Australian government’s proposed plan for MPA’s includes bans on fishing. Therefore 97 percent of the regulated regions may not even provide the expected benefits. The researchers reflect upon the recent general global trends for protected areas, whether they be on land or sea, that indicated reductions in area and regulation. The solution to increase the area of low regulated MPA’s was dubbed by John Turball as a “red herring” as the planned protected sanctuary zones were misleading and were unlikely to do much in regards to social and ecological effectiveness. A restructuring of function and refocusing of funds may prove more useful and cost effective. The researchers conclude that in order for MPA’s to result in a “return investment” it is more important to have high quality MPA’s over an abundance of poorly regulated areas.
Professor Johnston, a co-author of the aforementioned study, was adamant to disavow the claims that the paper aimed to dishearten conservation efforts. Rather she suggested that this study shone a light on the true value of conservation efforts and it may act as a framework for law/policy makers to evaluate whether their form of conservation was adequate for its intended purpose. Johnston stated that inorder to truly protect the planet, findings on partially protected areas should be released publicly. Therefore if they are failing to provide social benefit and ecological relief, existing regions should be upgraded to a level which is known to work.
